Carriers and fuel (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Chris21wen -> Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 8:02:59 PM)

Hyperthetical question, but I was hoping it had occured in my PBEM game.

If a carrier runs out of fuel can it still launch aircraft. Should be no, but I bet it isn't.



Terminus -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 8:04:10 PM)

Why shouldn't that be possible? WWII escort carriers could launch aircraft whilst at anchor.



Shark7 -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 8:25:03 PM)

They should be able to, though I would guess that the plane loads would have to be adjusted as they will not be getting the 30 kts head wind usually provided by the moving carrier. That 30kts does make a big difference on how much take-off weight can be.



Terminus -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 8:30:42 PM)

This is true, but survival-launching aircraft would definitely be possible.



BPRE -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 9:30:28 PM)

Hi,

I've seen the AI run out of fuel on it's carriers and when receiving inbound strikes not a single fighter took off.

I guess it's rather unusual for people to end up in such a situation (at least in the places the AI tend to do it [:D]) so it's probably not noticed.

/BPRE



Chris21wen -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 10:47:10 PM)

Turning into the wind and 30kts across the deck were deem essential for any a/c with a decent load.  Good pilots might make it off and landing would be even more hazardous.



tocaff -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/4/2008 11:09:15 PM)

A hazardous carrier landing!  Now that's funny as everyone knows that they're all semi controlled crashes.



bigjoe96912 -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/5/2008 2:44:04 AM)

Catapults catapults catapults, they all had them and yes they could launch an aircraft with a decent load at a full stop, been there done that (Americans had them anywho)



Shark7 -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/5/2008 3:19:50 AM)

True they had catapults, but the catapults were designed to launch the A/C at a certain weight with a certain airspeed over the deck. Even with the catapults, losing 30kts of headwind speed would require an adjustment of the a/c take-off load to reduce weight. Basically, the easiest way to reduce take-off weight is to 1) reduce ordnance or 2) reduce fuel. So you have a choice of less weapons or less range, or both.



herwin -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/5/2008 8:50:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Why shouldn't that be possible? WWII escort carriers could launch aircraft whilst at anchor.


They had a catapult and they used it. Couldn't launch a deckload strike that way, though.



bigjoe96912 -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/5/2008 11:19:12 PM)

Ok if you are out of gas why are you worried about launching a strike!!!! Duh let them Hellcats fly!!!!!!!



Jorm -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/6/2008 7:24:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bigjoe96912

Ok if you are out of gas why are you worried about launching a strike!!!! Duh let them Hellcats fly!!!!!!!


I think the OP was concerned as often carriers had to activly steam into the wind to launch a strike.
so erm, DUH!!! to you



JWE -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/6/2008 4:11:35 PM)

Don’t think it’s necessary to achieve 30 knots for operations. Your average Bogue CVE was built on a C3-S-A1 freighter hull and had a top speed of 16.5 knots. Your average Sangamon CVE was built on a T3 tanker hull and had a top speed of 18 knots.



treespider -> RE: Carriers and fuel (9/6/2008 4:31:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bigjoe96912

Catapults catapults catapults, they all had them and yes they could launch an aircraft with a decent load at a full stop, been there done that (Americans had them anywho)



So what's generating the steam for the catapults?



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.328125